Skip to main content


Return to Transcripts main page


Latest From Aruba; Interview With Michael Jackson Jurors

Aired June 23, 2005 - 21:00   ET


LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, new developments in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. A judge whose son has already been arrested is now in custody himself. And after more than three weeks, still, no sign of Natalee. We'll get all the latest from Aruba with Natalee Holloway's aunt, Robin Holloway and her uncle Dave Holloway, Mariaine Croes with the attorney general's office in Aruba, another aunt Marcia Twitty who is back home in Birmingham, Alabama, where CNN's Karl Penhaul is also on the scene.
And Michael Cardoza, the high profile defense attorney.

And then, eight members of the jury that found Michael Jackson not guilty of child molestation. They'll tell us what really went on behind those jury room doors. That's all next on LARRY KING LIVE.

We're back. And we welcome you to another edition of LARRY KING LIVE. This mysterious Aruba situation gets weirder and weirder, stranger and stranger.

Let's go to Aruba. Robin Holloway, Natalee Holloway's aunt is with us. Also in Aruba is Dave Holloway, her uncle. Are you two married, Robin?

ROBIN HOLLOWAY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S STEPMOTHER: This is Natalee's dad. I'm Natalee's stepmother.

KING: Okay. That's Natalee's father. Dave is not the uncle. He's the father.



KING: And Robin you're the stepmother, right?


KING: Dave, how long have you been there, Dave?

D. HOLLOWAY: I've been here whatever today is, the 23rd. I've been here 23 days.

KING: Any reports? What do you make of this all latest thing going on? Judges arrested, people released? What is your read?

D. HOLLOWAY: When I first arrived here, I was briefed by Beth and her husband on what had taken place. And I had a suspicion that the judge or these three suspects were possibly involved. And that has played out.

KING: And what led you to have that suspicion?

D. HOLLOWAY: Well, when you're looking for a child, and the father tells his son to be quiet and not say anything, that would lead me to believe they're trying to cover up something.

KING: And Robin Holloway, what do you make of it?

R. HOLLOWAY: Well, we were glad to hear he was arrested today. And we always had in our gut feeling that he had something to do with it. Maybe it's a father protecting his son, but I don't know. It was a good day.

KING: In Birmingham, Alabama is Marcia Twitty, who is Natalee Holloway's aunt. Have you been to Aruba, Marcia?

MARCIA TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S AUNT: No, I have not been to Aruba so far. I've been here the whole time.

KING: You are the aunt how. Explain how you became the aunt?

TWITTY: Beth and I are married to brothers.

KING: Beth and you and Beth is the mother.

TWITTY: Right. Right.

KING: Are you very close to Natalee?

TWITTY: You know, Natalee has been in our family for the past seven years. And I have children same age as Natalee. So, you know, we're around a lot of situations together, you know, pretty much.

KING: Must be frustrating being there in Birmingham.

TWITTY: Yeah, it has been. But we have had a lot going on here. We have been spending a lot of time with all the kids on the trip. So we have had a lot to do here and we have done a lot of media coverage from here just because people were interested in what was going on here in Birmingham.

KING: And what are those kids telling you?

TWITTY: You know, in the beginning they were telling us what pieces of information they knew, pretty much they were meeting with the authorities on the information that they had. And from then we have been meeting with the kids on a regular basis. Prayer groups every day. Trying to help the kids get back to somewhat of a normal life. So we have been busy working with these kids.

KING: Isn't all this news, Marcia, arrests, releases, holding 48 hours, confusing to you? TWITTY: It is extremely confusing, we have all had to learn Dutch law. And this is -- it is not like when you travel and something happens, you get to take American law with you. Something happened under another law system and we have had to learn that and yes it has been -- it has been very difficult for the family that's down here and very difficult for us in the States to learn that and understand it.

KING: Dave Holloway in all fairness and frankness, have you given up hope of her being alive?

D. HOLLOWAY: No, I haven't. There is still that small chance that she could be off the island somewhere.

KING: You mean that somehow she left Aruba with someone?

D. HOLLOWAY: Well, not under her own will, Larry. The FBI and the local authorities when they first spoke with these three individuals, they had the same story. And then after further interrogation those stories broke up and then now they have different stories. So in their thinking, there is probably foul play involved. But we still haven't found Natalee so we still have hopes that we may find her.

KING: You're in the unusual position, Robin, of hoping she's being held by someone.

R. HOLLOWAY: Who would have thought we would hope she is being held by somebody? But if she is, at least she could still be alive and we could still bring her home and we have not found her yet so there is still that chance. You have to hold on to that.

KING: That's what I mean, though. Your best case scenario is somebody has her.

R. HOLLOWAY: That's bad, but at least she would be alive.

KING: Yeah, you're not kidding. Dave, do you have much faith in the judicial system there?

D. HOLLOWAY: I do. I spoke with the prime minister approximately two weeks ago and I had those concerns about the individuals and their stature in the community. And the prime minister assured me, of course, he -- assured me that no one is above the law here and that would not be a factor.

KING: For a while, though, didn't it seem, Robin, like there was a keystone cops aspect to this? Arrest, releases, body found, not found, confession, non confession?

R. HOLLOWAY: I don't -- in the beginning, yes it seemed like that. But there is -- it is a slow process, we're learning a lot more about the Dutch law. But after today, I mean, they're really, really working hard. And we meet with somebody every day, they give us a short briefing and it is just like Dave referred to, it's a big puzzle, the pieces are slowly being filled and I think today, a big piece of the puzzle got filled in.

KING: By having the judge arrested?

R. HOLLOWAY: Oh, yes.

KING: Marcia Twitty, they still have hope. Do you?

TWITTY: Absolutely. We have not lost hope one bit. We're right there with them. We're looking for Natalee. And no, we have not given up hope.

KING: Despite all the days that have gone by and no sign and it is not a big island.

TWITTY: Despite all that, we still have hope, Larry, that we're going to find her.

KING: All right. We're going to take a break and come back. Then we'll be joined by Mariaine Croes, the spokeswoman for the Aruban attorney general's office. We'll get up to date on some of that law. And Michael Cardoza, one of the leading defense attorneys on the left coast in San Francisco will join us for his thoughts. Attorney looking at things so far away. Don't go away.


ANITA VAN DER SLOOT, SON JORAN AND HUSBAND PAUL: The neighbor called and somebody called from the house that there was a lot of police around the house. And they were there to speak to Paul. And Paul, because in my conversation with Joran, Joran said, mommy, I'm so afraid they're picking up daddy because that's that they telling me. And they came, the police came. And they took my husband just to another room. And then Ms. Avunastefe (ph) came back to tell me that they were taking my husband for interrogation.


KING: A little legalistics here. In Aruba, here is Mariaine Croes, she is the spokeswoman for the Aruban attorney general's office there. There you see her on the left. And in San Francisco is Michael Cardoza, the famed California defense attorney. Mariaine, bring us up to date. Who has been arrested and -- are there any charges? What is the latest?

MARIAINE CROES, ARUBA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE: Okay, what I can say at this moment is that this afternoon a fifth suspect was arrested in this case. He is the father of one of the other suspects, the minor suspect. At this point he's being held for 48 hours.

KING: And why are they suspects?

CROES: At this point the general description is that they are suspected of being involved in the disappearance of Ms. Holloway. That's the general description. But because when we arrest somebody, you have to have a reasonable suspicion of specific crimes, so at this point all the suspects are arrested on the first crime of premeditated murder.

KING: So that is -- is that a charge?

CROES: At this point it is only a reasonable suspicion. The definite accusation and in American system "charge" will be made when the investigation is finished. And the prosecutor has reviewed all of the evidence pertaining to this investigation.

KING: To your knowledge, have any other judges ever been charged like this in Aruba?

CROES: As far as I know, no.

KING: Michael Cardoza from San Francisco, the noted defense attorney. What do you make of this?

MICHAEL CARDOZA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I tell you what, right now I really think that the authorities down there are playing hard ball. Because what they're doing, remember, the kids changed their story. Joran, the judge's son at first said that they dropped them off and then he admits, well, she and I actually walked on the beach. So he changes his story to that later.

Then they bring his father, the judge into custody. It really does put on Joran, the boy, a lot of pressure. It is like, look, we got your dad in custody. You better tell us the truth. Then the other boys that are suspects their parents come into custody. You've got to think it is putting pressure on them. I know it is the reasonable suspicion, but you really wonder what they have.

But on the other side of the coin, we have a missing girl. And the most important thing is to find out what is going on. So in that vein, are they doing the right thing? Most people would say sure, turn the screws on. Put the pressure on them, find out what really happened here. But do they really have anything? My guess would be no right now. They're really grasping at straws.

KING: Does it also mean, Mariaine Croes, that at this point you can't say a crime has been committed?

CROES: At this point the suspects are in custody because they are being suspected of committing a crime. But, no, at this point we cannot say definitely if a crime was committed and what crime that was. That is something that will have to result out of our investigation.

KING: How would this similar situation be dealt with, Michael, in the United States?

CARDOZA: Well, I tell you, somewhat the same way. You wouldn't see the parents being arrested, though, unless you had some evidence. Because think about what they're doing here. You have a judge down in Aruba, a man with a great reputation. Unless they have some really strong evidence against him, really strong evidence, beyond that reasonable suspicion, I would think, don't bring this guy in. You have literally ruined his life right now. Because there always will be people, even if he's cleared later, there will always be somebody that will say, you know what, I wonder -- I wonder if he really did know.

And remember, his son is in custody. What did he do, maybe, just tell the son to be quiet? Don't talk? What father wouldn't tell their son that? So that judge is being torn in a different way. He's got to abide by the law, but also it is his young son. It is his son. So what does he do? He perchance, gives him good advice. Don't talk.

So I really hope -- I really hope if they brought him in, that - and this is going to sound strange, that they have some strong evidence against him because if they don't, honestly, shame on them. Because they're ruing this man's life.

KING: Isn't that true, Mariaine?

CROES: Of course that is true. And that's why we don't go picking up suspects. We have to have the reasonable suspicion. That's for us at this point very important. And we do have that at this point.

KING: Karl Penhaul, our CNN correspondent also on the scene in Aruba. What is the opinion generally if you talk to the public there about this judge in this whole thing?

KARL PENHAUL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Larry, as far as the public's reaction to the judge's arrest, still a little bit too fresh to talk to that. The judge was picked up about 2:00 p.m. local time. So we're only talking a little over six, seven hours ago. I'm sure that by tomorrow that word will be around on the street. But this has been rumored for some time. The word on the street that the general public had been expecting for several days now for the judge to be picked up, especially following the fact that two days over the weekend he was called in for interviewing by police. Although at that stage police said he was interviewed as a possible witness, not as a suspect, Larry.

KING: In other words, they're not saying that this judge committed directly a crime, are they, Karl?

PENHAUL: In general terms, what the public says about this family is that, yes, it is a well respected family, that the Judge Paul Van der Sloot is a fairly quiet man, beyond that, though, what the Aruban people, like the authorities here are saying, is that they really want to resolve this case. They believe it is long overdue right now and are moving as fast as they can and say they want to move as fast as possible to resolve this, Larry.

KING: Okay. Mariaine Croes, we thank you. I know you have to be somewhere else. We'll take a break and come back. The Holloways will rejoin us along with Marcia Twitty. Michael Cardoza will remain and so will Karl Penhaul.

At the bottom of the hour, we'll meet eight of the 12 Jackson jurors. Don't go away.


NADIRA RAMIREZ, MOTHER OF SUSPECTS SATISH AND DEEPAK KALPOE: I ask him, Satish, are you sure you guys didn't do anything. No, mama, we give that girl and Joran a lift. They don't even know Natalee. They said she didn't even introduce herself to them, hi, I am Natalee. They don't even talk a word with her. They said me and my brother give them a lift and they came home. They don't know anything else about that. I said, Satish, mama is trusting you guys. They said, I'm telling you, mama, we didn't do anything.



KING: In Aruba is Robin Holloway, Natalee Holloway's stepmother and Dave Holloway, Natalee Holloway's uncle -- or, rather, Natalee Holloway's father. In Birmingham, Alabama is Marcia Twitty, Natalee Holloway's aunt. In San Francisco, defense attorney Michael Cardoza. And in Aruba is CNN correspondent Ken (sic) Penhaul. Robin, did any of what Mariaine Croes say satisfy you?

R. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, that's pretty much what we have been told, just ...

KING: Dave, weren't you frustrated by all of this?

D. HOLLOWAY: Am I frustrated with all of this?

KING: Yeah.

D. HOLLOWAY: Well, I know -- I've seen other cases and I've seen how the process works. And I remain optimistic and positive about it. Yes, I would have liked for it to have been over with a long time ago. And I'm hopeful that it will come to conclusion pretty quickly. We just got to hope that the police get their breaks and we get a conclusion.

R. HOLLOWAY: A confession.

KING: Marcia Twitty in Birmingham, are you satisfied with what you heard to this point?

TWITTY: Yeah, you know what, Larry from the very day that Beth got to Aruba, she has said very strongly that she felt like the 17- year-old Dutch boy and the father knew something about where Natalee might be. I mean, she has stuck with that from the beginning. So hopefully now with him bringing this dad in custody, that maybe we'll start get something answers that this family so desperately wants.

KING: Michael Cardoza, what would you do as defense attorney here?

CARDOZA: I'll tell you what, first thing is everybody be quiet, quit talking. Look what got the boy into trouble, Joran was changing his story. Now, remember that is from a defense attorney standpoint. As a person, you know, I want this solved. All defense attorneys that have children or don't have children would want a crime like this solved. But going for the defense attorney role, you got to tell your client, because we owe them that obligation, do not talk because believe me, you're only going to get yourself into trouble.

And as I say, look what happened here. The kid changed his story, they bring in the father, and the whole house of cards apparently might be beginning to tumble here. But as I said, I really hope they have something with the dad other than he may have talked to his son. So we'll see as it unfolds.

KING: Michael, supposing you were representing the Holloways.

CARDOZA: I'll tell you what, I would be aggressive. I would be in there telling them to arrest everybody. Bring them in. Put the pressure on them. It depends which side of the coin you're standing on, which side of the ledger are we on here. As the family of the victims here, or hopefully not a victim, but as the family of Natalee, turn the pressure on, bring them on.

But on the other side you have to be cognizant that you don't want to ruin people's lives. And you don't want this government being pressured by all the news media that is down there. You know, handle this case as you would handle every other case. Turn the blind eye to the media. Do it slowly. Do it correctly. So if you can prove the crime, bring it to court so you have the right evidence. Don't rush to judgment here. It may take some time.

KING: Dave, why aren't you pounding the desk? Why aren't you, like, angry?

D. HOLLOWAY: Why? Well, I'm very optimistic and positive, Larry that the police are doing the best job that they can do. The FBI guys that I've been talking to have told me -- the guys behind the scenes are very good and very good at what they're doing. What makes it difficult is we look at the American judicial system versus the Dutch judicial system. And it was hard for us to understand that at first.

And that was a first week or so -- it was difficult. Difficulties in how they do things and how they take witness statements and then follow back up with possible arrests. So all of these suspects had the opportunity to tell the truth and apparently when you lie, it is hard to remember what you're lie was. So they were called it several time and some inconsistencies developed and then they changed their stories. So, you know, I just hope that they get all the birds together and they're going start singing.

R. HOLLOWAY: We are angry. But the answer lies with the three suspects. They know where Natalee is and until they talk, yeah, we're angry and frustrated. But it is because of them -- if they would tell the truth.

KING: So Robin, just to be clear, you are not mad at authorities?

R. HOLLOWAY: No. The guys that know where she is, that's who we're angry with. We deserve the truth. KING: And you're convinced they know where she is. Right, Dave?

D. HOLLOWAY: Oh, yes. They're the last -- those three boys were the last ones with Natalee. And they hold the answers.

KING: Marcia, as you know your niece, was she have run off with someone?

TWITTY: No. No. Natalee -- no, Natalee would not -- no, she would not do this. She would not under her own free will just leave. No.

KING: So it is obvious, Michael, something, a crime has happened, right? Some type of crime.

CARDOZA: Well -- maybe. It certainly sounds like a crime. You know like the old -- if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, it is probably a duck. It's probably a crime. But you don't know and I know - and my empathies really go out to the family. But to say the people in custody know where she is, they might be right. But they might be wrong too.

Because these kids changed their story, they could be very frightened and go, okay, we dropped her at the hotel and later on, all right, I really did walk around the beach. I was with her. But I left. That sounds a little strange. To hear from family. And I understand this I really do. When they say, oh, our daughter wouldn't do that. I've represented too many kids and too many people to know yeah, you hope your daughter wouldn't do that. But you get them down there and on a vacation, maybe they have a couple of drinks and maybe they have real bad judgment.

Remember, this was a high school graduation party. Was there drinking going on? Maybe she had too much to drink and that affected her judgment. So basically it is -- we really don't know what happened here. The police really should question thoroughly these people. But I wouldn't be really that quick to say they know where they are. Maybe they do. But let's wait and see. And we weren't privy to the conversations that went on. So who knows.

KING: Let's hope. Thank you, all. Thank you everyone for being our guest in this half hour.

When we come back, an extraordinary half hour ahead, there were 12 jurors in the Jackson case. And eight of them, eight of them will be right here and we'll talk to them on LARRY KING LIVE next. Don't go away.


KING: We have had lots of guests on this program. And sometimes in various parts of the country and world. I don't think we ever had on eight on together in the room. Maybe in political season. Let's go around and meet the member of the jury and find out some things about what happened to the Jackson case. Michael, what was it like for you to be on jury duty? MICHAEL STEVENS, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #7: It was the first time I've ever done it and what a way to start, I would say. When I got the summons in the mail, I didn't quite know it was for the Jackson trial, and so I'm sitting going, OK, what is this going to be for? And then the closer it got to the date of the summons, which is the 31st of January, the more news came about that it was going to be for the Jackson jury.

KING: Did you want to be on the jury?

STEVENS: I didn't care either way.

KING: What was it like for you, Tammy? Tammy Bolton.

TAMMY BOLTON, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #6: Well, I never expected to be picked, you know.

KING: Why?

BOLTON: There was a pool of, gosh, a lot of people. We had a courtroom full of people. And when they stood us up and swore us in, I was so surprised, I kind of looked around, because I wasn't sure.

KING: Did you like the experience of serving?

BOLTON: And my heart dropped.

KING: Did you like it?

BOLTON: It's definitely an amazing experience, I'd have to say.

KING: Wouldn't want to do it again, though?


KING: Raymond, what was it like for you? You were on with us right after the verdict.

RAYMOND HULTMAN, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #1: Yes. Well, it was a little strange. I actually moved to Santa Maria about two years ago, and registered to vote, and that was where I made the mistake.

KING: You got called.

HULTMAN: I got called.

KING: Did you like or not like the experience?

HULTMAN: Well, actually, I'm kind of with Tammy. I never expected that I would actually be selected for the jury. I've been summoned a few times before, but I've never been actually selected for a jury, and this was totally a surprise to me.

KING: Melissa Herard, what was it like for you?

MELISSA HERARD, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #8: It was pretty interesting. I received my summons, and I knew it was for the Jackson trial. And I was the one sitting up against the wall in the back when the judge says, well, there will be somebody sitting up against the wall in the back that will be chosen to come up front, and next thing you know I was the 13th juror called, and I was in the back.

KING: What was the experience like?

HERARD: It was -- it was exciting at some times. And other times it was pretty difficult.

KING: And boring sometimes?


KING: Yeah, that's part of jury duty. Being bored, right? Paulina Coccoz.


KING: What was it like for you?

COCCOZ: I thought it was great. My first time as well. I couldn't have, I guess, been picked for a better one. And a lot of ups and downs, a lot of, I guess, rearranging in your life and trying to adapt, I guess, to their schedule opposed to what we're used to. Change of diets. There was a lot of things involved. But great experience. Loved it.

KING: Wouldn't want do it again, though, right?

COCCOZ: Hopefully not, no.

KING: Susan Rentchler, what was it like?

SUSAN RENTCHLER, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #4: It was interesting. I was selected for jury duty 15 years ago when I was in my eighth month of pregnancy. And...

KING: You were excused.

RENTCHLER: So I was excused. And this is the first time they have called me back.

KING: What was the experience like?

RENTCHLER: It was a good experience. It was real interesting. I'm retired, so it wasn't a real hardship on my part.

KING: Wouldn't want to do it again, though?

RENTCHLER: I think I have served my duty for quite a while.

KING: Ellie Cook, you're writing a book about this, right?


KING: And you were the one who got ticked off by the mother, right?

COOK: Oh, big time. Big time.

KING: I'll get to that. But what was it like to serve?

COOK: What was it like to serve? It was an eye-opener. I really like our country and I like the fact that we do serve. And this is such a diverse group of people. It really -- it was a great experience.

KING: Would you say it was a hard-working jury?

COOK: Yes, oh, definitely. Definitely. I really do.

KING: Susan Drake, what was it like for you?

SUSAN DRAKE, MICHAEL JACKSON JUROR #3: It was a life-changing experience. I had a...

KING: Changing?

DRAKE: Changing. Yes.

KING: How so?

DRAKE: Well, I'm a horse trainer, and I had the Olympic dream and I had a focus and a path, and all of a sudden something even more important came along. And I really took it seriously. I felt the weight of the world's eyes upon us. And...

KING: This was more important to you than your own...

DRAKE: Absolutely. Absolutely.

KING: ... career. And what is the bell for?

DRAKE: The bell was...

KING: Ringing, what is that bell?


KING: What is it?

DRAKE: We were only allowed to talk about the case when everyone was in the room. If you had a potty break or leaving, no one could talk about it. Only one person could talk at a time. And you can imagine at times, several people had opinions that wanted to be voiced at the same time. So I was the official bellringer.

KING: Meaning they had to be all there? If they were all there, you could voice opinions?

DRAKE: Yes. One at a time.

COOK: One at a time. That was the biggie. One at a time. KING: This was in deliberation, right? You could never discuss it before that, right?

DRAKE: No, with anyone else.

KING: Could you all honestly say, swear, that you watched no media, read no newspaper?

COOK: I swear.


KING: Wasn't that hard to do?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was hard. Very hard.



STEVENS: How can you not like go into a supermarket, you know, and...

KING: And see the headline in the paper.

STEVENS: Overhear two people talking about it, you know.

KING: So what did you do when confronted with everyday life?

STEVENS: Turn around and go do something else.

KING: What did you do?

HULTMAN: I read a lot of newspapers with big holes in them where my wife had cut out...

KING: She cut them out, and you didn't discuss it with her.

HULTMAN: ... Michael Jackson articles. No, I did not. No. And that was a difficult part of the whole five month experience, was it basically became my job. And normally when I come home from work, you know, I talk to my wife about my job. And in this case, I really couldn't. And that was difficult.

KING: So none of you ever turned on CNN or any of the other networks. Didn't watch news?

RENTCHLER: I had to stop watching news, because, you know, it was everywhere.

KING: It could come up at any time.

RENTCHLER: So I just stopped -- I stopped watching and I -- I'm a big news watcher. So.

KING: Let me get a -- let me get a break and we'll come back with more of three quarters of the Jackson jury. Don't go away.



TOM SNEDDON, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY DA: Obviously, we're disappointed in the verdict, but we work every day in a system of justice. We believe in the system of justice. And I've been a prosecutor for 37 years. In 37 years, I have never quarreled with a jury's verdict. And I'm not going to start today.


KING: Susan Drake, were there many arguments in discussion?

DRAKE: No, we were just going over the evidence and 108 pages of jury instruction. It took a long time to go over the information.

KING: Was there ever a time, Ellie, where someone wanted to vote for conviction?

COOK: Yes.

KING: More than -- by the way, let me correct. I said three- quarters. And our Raymond Hultman, our fantastic engineer juror, corrected me, that we are two-thirds of the jury. We're not three- quarters. He'll never be back. Take a good look at him. You don't correct the host.

Back to you, Ellie.

COOK: Yes, sir.

KING: Was there more than one? That wanted a conviction on maybe one of the counts?

COOK: There were a couple of things that I wanted -- I can't even remember them now to be honest with you, without my notes and paper here in front of me. But there was a couple of things that I thought that he was guilty of, but we couldn't prove it. And so we had to go with not being able to prove it; we had no choice.

KING: We had some -- two people, different people tell us they thought he was a predator, but that was not proven in this case.

COOK: Exactly.

KING: How many of you by show of hands thought he was a predator in his life? The rest of you do not know that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I do not know that.



KING: Absolutely not?


KING: Then what do you make of all the testimony you heard from the previous kid who got a settlement?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, he got a settlement.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There were no charges filed. There was no trial.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No criminal case.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was a civil case. There was a settlement in that case.

KING: Was there ever a time where you thought, Tammy, that there were time in that trial where you thought I'm going for guilty here? In your mind, going home at night?

BOLTON: I don't really think there was. I sat and I replayed everything in my head over and over again. And I tried not to stick to one thing or the other and to listen to everything thoroughly. I can't say there was anything that convinced me to say guilty ever throughout the whole trial.

KING: What was the prosecution's weakness, Raymond?

HULTMAN: I think...

KING: What didn't they do right?

HULTMAN: Well, I think the prosecution did everything they could possibly do with this case. I think the problem was the family. But as the prosecutor would tell you, they don't pick their victims is what they said. And in this case, the accuser and his family had some real credibility problems. And that was kind of the key to the whole issue.

KING: So even though you thought he may have been in the past a predator, they didn't prove it in this case.

HULTMAN: That's right. And the evidence from the 1993-94 incident was allowed to come into the case only for that purpose. Which was to provide either evidence that he showed a pattern for doing this kind of thing or he didn't. And then you could use that as you would...

KING: And you didn't see that as a pattern.

HULTMAN: I saw it as a pattern.

KING: But...

HULTMAN: But there wasn't enough evidence to prove he had molested the accuser in this case. KING: Paulina, why do you think he's the -- the record is clear to you on him?

COCCOZ: I want to say, you know, I think the prosecution did a wonderful job. They went through with a fine toothed comb. And I think Mr. Sneddon, you know, he did his best. And we have to, you know, really give them credit for that.

But there was nothing -- we had a closet full of evidence. There was nothing in that closet that was able to convince any of us of the alleged crimes. And, I mean, it was -- I kept waiting and waiting throughout the trial you know, when are they going to bring in some kind of evidence that was going to be convincing and they never brought it.

KING: The prior evidence didn't work on the settlement thing?

COCCOZ: Well, in this case, you know.

KING: It didn't work?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It didn't work for us, no.


COCCOZ: He's absolutely innocent of all these alleged accusations.

KING: Was there a chance you would have convicted anything guilty, Susan, on one of the minor counts?

DRAKE: Nothing. I went in there with a courage to convict a celebrity. Because I really believe in doing what is right. And witness after witness I was more convinced of the innocence, because of the motivations of financial gain and revenge, it was just amazing the way it was laid out.

KING: So, when an accuser says this is celebrity justice and celebrities can get justice, all you've say no to that?


KING: You can divorce the fact that Michael Jackson was a superstar?

HULTMAN: Absolutely.

KING: Was that easy to do?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In that courtroom, he didn't look like a superstar.

KING: What was it like to look at him every day?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, he wore white socks every day.

KING: He did look at you a lot?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He looked like a very unhealthy man.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Towards the end, he just was looking a little -- I saw him every day.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That was very stressful in that courtroom. All of us, I mean, it took its toll on all of us. We -- there was days that, like he mentioned, were boring. And things were just like too hard to keep your eyes open and we had some humorous moments, too. We had some good laughs.

COOK: But one thing I can say, anyway, and admiration for his mother, she was the one person, the one relative that was there every single solitary day.

KING: Michael's mother.

COOK: Michael's mother. She never missed a day. And she always looked lovely. And sat there with such dignity.

KING: Did you like Mesereau?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I thought he was an excellent lawyer. I would have him on my team any day.

KING: Did you like the prosecutor?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They did well too.

KING: Did you like the judge?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, very much so. Very much.

KING: Loved the judge?


KING: We'll ask about that. We'll be right back. With two- thirds of the jury. Right after this.


THOMAS MESEREAU, MICHAEL JACKSON'S ATTORNEY: You never know what a jury is going to do, you don't know those 12 people. They're not personal friends of yours. You don't know what makes them tick.

But I always had a good feeling about this jury. I always felt that our case was going in very well. And I always thought the truth would prevail.

And I really felt that these jurors were very independent minded, that nobody was going push them around, they were going to follow the law and do what's right. (END VIDEO CLIP)


KING: Not the full jury but what the hell. I ain't covered by the law. Only two-thirds. What it you make since you couldn't read the papers or anything, or know about any criticism, what did you make of, Michael, of the pajamas, wearing pajamas?

STEVENS: I didn't get a good look. Where I sat in the box was number 7. So, I was closest to the witness stand. And where I sat, there is like like -- there is the tables is right here and there's a big, huge podium right there. So, I couldn't really see.

KING: Who could see?


KING: What did you think?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't think nothing of it. I knew he was late that day, because we had to wait locked up all 20 of us in that little room. And we could tell that he arrived, because we could hear the screaming. And when we were brought into the courtroom, and stuff, I actually -- I looked at my -- I looked at him and stuff and wrote in my notes, Michael looks kind of sick today. Hope he's OK.

KING: Do you know that many in the media, many who are critical of your decision at the end thought the pajamas would weigh heavily.


HULTMAN: I didn't even know he had the pajamas on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We didn't see the pajamas, No. 1. And No. 2, he went to the hospital. And after reading it, he went to the hospital. And if he didn't come straight to court after that...

KING: Susan, when you saw him, you didn't think it was strange?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Honestly, I didn't...

KING: Ah, the pundits.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't tell anybody else, see. We're not allowed to speak to them. None of them knew. I knew he had jammies on.

KING: But you couldn't tell him, did you see he has pajamas?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, I didn't talk to him about any of that.

KING: How did your families handle all this? How did your husband, Paulina, deal with you on this case? Didn't he ask you? COCCOZ: Yeah. I think at times, he noticed the stress on my face and he would ask me, you know, how I was doing and how I was holding up. But he was very devoted to helping me boil my eggs.


COCCOZ: I took hard-boiled eggs every day. That was my meal, you know. He was wonderful.

KING: Do you tend to bond?



KING: As a group?


KING: Were you going to write a book as a group?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's a good thought.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah, that's a good thought.

KING: Might you do it?


KING: Are you going to write a separate book?

COOK: Yes, I'm writing a book. I'm with Larry Garrison (ph) of Silver Creek Enterprises. And my granddaughter is my agent. So we -- I worked yesterday.

KING: Why, Ellie? Why the need to write a book?

COOK: I don't know that I need to write a book, as my granddaughter has said from the beginning, write a book. And I'm -- what I'm really writing about is the bonding of this jury and the nice people I'm with. Because I've said that's to me more important.

KING: What about the mother ticked you off so much?

COOK: Well, she was just downright rude to us as far as I'm concerned. And I think she set her son up. I think she's probably the poorest excuse for a mother I've ever known.

KING: Do you all feel that way?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not quite in those words...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not in those words.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You don't think she's going to get an award for motherhood, but I just wanted... (CROSSTALK)

RENTCHLER: I feel sorry for them.

HERARD: I feel sorry for (INAUDIBLE).


HERARD: I do. I do.

KING: Did it bother you, Raymond, that she looked at you?

HULTMAN: You know, I tried to look past that, Larry, but it's really hard when she is really staring the jury down...


HULTMAN: ... and being, you know, really in your face. But I really tried to set that aside and listen to what she was saying. But in the end, I think that her demeanor did affect the credibility.

KING: What, Tammy, was the strongest aspect of the prosecution's case? What to you had some weight?

HERARD: The phone records.

BOLTON: There you go.


KING: The phone records?

BOLTON: Probably. No, because those didn't link anything together either for us. I mean, there was no links.

KING: Why are you hysterical, Melissa?

HERARD: Because just -- I -- oh, phone records. When we saw the -- towards the end, when the prosecutor came back in with some more phone records, I know what I wrote in my book wasn't nice. Phone records, that was a very boring, very boring thing.

KING: There is a lot of boredom in the trial, isn't there?




DRAKE: A comment I had made early on is the credibility was in the phone people, but even prosecutor Nicola was saying 10 seconds on the phone, and you get billed a minute.


KING: Let me take a break and we'll be back with more of the jury. Don't go away.


KING: There were reports that Paulina and Ellie argued at times about guilty or not guilty. Did you ever?

COOK: I don't think we argued, did we? Well, maybe we did.

KING: In the jury room. Come on, Paulina, (INAUDIBLE).

COCCOZ: I guess we argued. There was just -- you know, we're both I guess pretty stubborn. And...

KING: She wanted guilty?


KING: You wanted guilty?

COOK: There was a couple of things there I thought he was guilty of, yes.

KING: Why did you give in? Why didn't you hold your ground?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was no proof.

COCCOZ: She couldn't mix her personal beliefs with what the decision was supposed to be based on, and I think we all had to remind each other that we couldn't do that, that was not abiding by what the rules were to us.

KING: You think there she was right in pointing that out, that maybe you were leaning toward a personal feeling?

COOK: That was hard not to. And that's why I -- in the beginning, I pleaded with the judge not to be on the jury. And that was one of the reasons.

But I was on the jury. And I did have to leave my personal beliefs aside and go with the proof. And let me tell you, I did try to find proof. I did not find it.

KING: Paulina, you went to the victory party. Why?

COCCOZ: It just kind of happened that way. It wasn't planned or anything. And I had a lot of fun.

KING: Did any of you think of going? Susan, did you want to go?

DRAKE: I didn't know of it.

KING: Would you have gone?

DRAKE: I'm not sure that would have been my choice.

KING: Do you want to go, Michael? STEVENS: If I was invited, kind of. I heard about it.

KING: Was there an invitation to you?

COCCOZ: It wasn't a personal invitation, no.

KING: They just said, there's a party, come.

Would you gone?

BOLTON: I might have went. I might have went. Yeah.


KING: Were all of you Jackson fans? Fans of the music?

HERARD: I was. And I said that.

KING: Ellie, no?

COOK: No. Well, my age group, when you're 79 years old, I'm not going to go out there and do a moonwalk.

COCCOZ: Come on, Ellie.

COOK: Well, maybe I would.

KING: Do you -- were you a fan, Raymond?

HULTMAN: I enjoyed some of the music, yeah. But I wouldn't classify myself as a fan.

KING: Why do we like, Melissa, the judge so much?

HERARD: Because he -- because he made us very comfortable. I know for me personally, he made me feel at ease. He was, I think he was very fair to both sides. And when he meant business, he meant business. And it wasn't all fun and games in the courtroom. He knew when we were getting stressed, because he could look at us, and he would give us the time for, like, an early break, let's take early break now. You know, and sometimes he would want to take a break.

KING: Did you read, Susan, did you read, Susan Rentchler, his instructions fully?


KING: You did?

RENTCHLER: We all did.

KING: All 120 pages?

RENTCHLER: That was the first thing we did as when we went back is we read all of them.



KING: You were the reader?


KING: You read it to the group?

STEVENS: Yeah. Whatever we needed -- that needed to be read, we read again and again.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We stopped and discussed certain parts of...

KING: I want to thank you for participating with us tonight. I really appreciate you coming. You, two-thirds of the jury. And they were Raymond Hultman, Ellie Cook, Paulina Coccoz, Melissa Herard, Michael Stevens, Tammy Bolton, Susan Rentchler and Susan Drake. And we thank you all very much.


KING: I congratulate you on your service.


KING: By the way, what did you make? What was the pay?

COOK: Oh, $14 a day.

COCCOZ: No, $15 a day.

COOK: $15 a day.

KING: And plus gas?


COOK: Only one way, 37 cents. I got that one right.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They got us there and didn't care about how we got back.

KING: I knew you people would make money off of this. Thank you all very much.

Tomorrow night, we'll look at "Extreme Makeovers," and we're going to do some and see some right on this show.

Here is a man who needs no makeover. He was born this way, he has never had a touchup, he never touched his face. He wouldn't dare go under the knife. What you see is what you get. There's Aaron Brown.

AARON BROWN, HOST, NEWSNIGHT: You got it. You got it. KING: Our makeover from the start.

BROWN: Thank you, I think.


© 2007 Cable News Network.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map.
Offsite Icon External sites open in new window; not endorsed by
Pipeline Icon Pay service with live and archived video. Learn more
Radio News Icon Download audio news  |  RSS Feed Add RSS headlines